RG
Some of these "facts" are dubious at best, and downright political
posturing at worst.
2. Price increase. The real fact is that oil is a fungible commodity
on the world market in which we all participate. How more oil on the
market would increase costs flies in the face of the supply and demand
principle.
3. Job creation. All the numbers are pure speculation. One thing that
is beyond dispute is that the pipeline WOULD create jobs.
4 Leaks: give me a break. Your own car "leaks". It doesn't constitute
a world calamity. The safety and maintenance protocols in place in
the petroleum industry are massive. Surely you remember this if you
ever sailed on tankers.
5. Environmental concerns. This is pure ideological bullshit - much
like "global warming" , a massive scam that enriched Al Gore and his
ilk to the tune of billions of dollars in "carbon credits". And by
the way, there is no "massive majority" of scientists who buy into
this bullshit. In FACT, quite the contrary.
JS
---------- Original Message ----------
From: R George <xgeorge@xxxxxxx>
To: sparkscoffee@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [sparkscoffee] Re: Keystone Pipeline, was Re: How much does
it cost to buy the U.S. Senate?
Date: Thu, 08 May 2014 13:52:16 -0700
*Here are six facts about the proposed Keystone XL deal that make
clear why the pipeline was a bad deal for America and why it deserved
to be rejected:**
*
*1. Keystone XL Would Not Reduce Foreign Oil Dependency*
The oil to be sent through Keystone XL pipeline was never destined for
US markets. In its own presentation to investors about the proposed
pipeline extension, TransCanada (the company behind Keystone XL)
boasted that most if not all of the extracted and refined oil would be
exported --- sold in oversees markets where oil fetches a higher price
(and thus turns a higher profit for the company).
*2. Keystone XL Would Have Increased Domestic Oil Prices*
Currently, Canadian oil reserves stored in the Midwest help suppress
gas prices in the United States, particularly for farmers in our
nation's heartland.
In its permit application for the pipeline, TransCanada noted that the
Keystone XL pipeline would allow the company to drain these reserves
and export that fuel as well. According to TransCanada's own
statements, this would raise gas prices in the United States,
especially in the Midwest.
*3. Keystone XL Overstated Number of Jobs to be Created*
In 2008, TransCanada's original permit application to the State
Department said the Keystone XL pipeline would create "a peak
workforce of approximately 3,500 to 4,200 construction personnel" in
temporary jobs building the pipeline.
By 2011, now facing growing opposition to the pipeline, TransCanada
had inflated these numbers (using undisclosed formulas) to 20,000.
Supporters of the proposal, backed by big oil, have since trumpeted
these trumped up numbers.
*4. Current Keystone Pipeline Leaked 12 Times in Last Year*
The pipeline that the Obama administration has rejected the permit for
would be an extension of a pipeline that has already leaked -- not
just once, but 12 times in the last year.
While TransCanada tried to dismiss these leaks as "minor" averaging
"just five to 10 gallons of oil" each, the leak on May 7, 2011 near
Millner, N.D., spilled about 21,000 gallons of oil in total.
*5. The Environmental Concerns About Oil Leaks Are Justified*
Nebraska's Republican Governor Dave Heineman strongly opposed the
Keystone XL project because the pipeline would run through a massive
and vital aquifer in his state the supplies clean drinking water to
over 2 million Americans plus water that fuels the region's
agriculture industry.
Building the pipeline might have created a few thousand temporary jobs
but even a minor oil spill in or near the aquifer would have
jeopardized hundreds of thousands of jobs, not to mention the health
and safety of millions.
Meanwhile, in Michigan where a similar tar sands pipeline spilled over
840,000 gallons of crude oil into the Kalamazoo River in 2010,
residents are still complaining of headaches, dizziness and nausea
while studies continue to look at the long-term effects of just being
near such an oil spill when it happens.
*6. Mining Tar Sands Would Worsen Global Warming*
Assuming you believe, like the vast majority of the world's
scientists, that climate change is both real and of concern, the
Canadian tar sands are the second largest carbon reserve in the world.
Mining these reserves would release all of that carbon into the
atmosphere, to detrimental effect on our environment. Sure, Canada
might go ahead and mine the tar sands anyway, but the United States
doesn't have to help pollute the planet and our own states in the process.
No matter how you look at it, the Keystone XL proposal was a slimy,
scam of a deal. America is better than that.
We can create good-paying jobs that build our families and our economy
for the future without hurting our environment today.
We can invest in innovative energy technology that not only reduces
our dependence on dirty fuel but also puts us in the lead in critical,
emerging markets.
We can prioritize good jobs and a competitive economy of the future,
with all the upsides of American energy production and innovation and
far, far fewer of the downsides that Keystone carried.
Let's focus on more of those deals going forward.
Sally Kohn is a Fox News Contributor and grassroots strategist. You
can find her online at http://sallykohn.com.
On 5/8/2014 1:23 PM, Ron Ristad wrote:
Kelly,
The Keystone pipeline that Obama is blocking would transport oil
from the Canadian Oil Sands to the U.S.. The reason why it is
being blocked is because Warren Buffet, one of Obama's biggest
contributors, owns the rail cars that are currently being used to
transport this oil to the U.S. at a considerably higher cost
thepipeline would be. The "environmentalists" that are supposedly
blocking it claim that it could harm the environment when the fact
is that there are already millions of miles of oil pipelines in
the U.S. and none that have caused any environmental damage. At
the same time there have been catastrophic rail car accidents that
have caused considerable damage to both people and the environment.
The part of the southern part of the Keystone pipeline that
delivers oil to the Gulf was completed last year and began
shipping oil on Jan 21st. Obama had no issues with that.
-RR
-----Original Message-----
From: Kelly <kellyutah@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: May 8, 2014 2:02 PM
To: "sparkscoffee@xxxxxxxxxxxxx" <sparkscoffee@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: [sparkscoffee] Re: How much does it cost to buy the
U.S. Senate?
I think it's funny how the pipeline issue is being cast as an
environmental issue. This completely masks the real economic
issue here. A massive source of cheap fossil fuel energy that
could power a resurgence of the American economy has been
discovered right here on our own continent. Refining and
selling locally to Americans would result in dramatic price
reductions in gasoline and other petroleum distillates. But
there's more money in selling it overseas, so the big oil
companies need to build a pipeline to get the oil to a seaport
where it can be put on ships and sold for a higher profit.
Oil companies will get their cake and eat it too. They'll
sell local oil overseas wherever they can maximize profits,
while at the same time, keeping a lid on local supplies and
therefore price.
If you support giving Keystone their pipeline you're
supporting continued outrageous prices at the gas pump.
Kelly A.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Thu, 8 May 2014 07:50:44 -0600
From: ristad@xxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [sparkscoffee] How much does it cost to buy the U.S.
Senate?
To:
Left wing billionaire pledges $100 million to buy the Senate.
-RR
One man has answered the question, "How much does it cost to
buy the U.S. Senate?" The price tag and his name came to light
as the only plausible explanation for an otherwise
inexplicable event.
Two months ago, an even more bizarre spectacle than usual took
place on the Senate floor. From the evening of March 10th
through to the next morning, about 30 Democratic senators held
a 14-hour+ speechathon. The event was billed as an attempt to
push America into addressing "climate change." Translation: It
was meant to publicize measures that would rectify so-called
'global warming' and protect against environmental 'threats'
such as the oil and gas industries....
Thomas Steyer...has been called the most influential man in
America with whom next to no one is familiar...
... Steyer hosted a recent fundraiser at his San Francisco
home that netted the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee
$400,000 and where Senate Majority Leader Harry M. Reid
(D-Nev.) and the six other Democratic senators in attendance
openly discussed plans for ...[ the] talkathon, according to
reports."
In other words, the speechathon was planned at the
billionaire's home in Reid's presence. The uber-influencial
Reid is the same Democratic Senator who lambasted the
billionaire Koch brothers for their donations to Republican
causes and campaigns. On March 10, the /Business Insider/
reported Reid as stating, "I'm trying to find a Republican --
somebody, anybody -- who will raise an objection to two
brothers trying to buy America." Apparently, Reid wants only
the Senate to be up for sale, and only to a Democratic buyer.
*How Much Did it Cost ... Steyer and the Democrats?*
*
*
So what /was/ the Senate's price tag? Let's see ... the
talk-a-thon reportedly lasted 15 hours. With the dangled
pledge of $100 million to Democrats, Steyer was able to buy
(or rent) the floor of the Senate at a rate of $6 million an
hour. I agree with the twitterer who wrote, "Who says Congress
is broken?" The fact that someone is willing to pay $6 million
an hour for it is a clear free-market sign of its worth.
Correction: This has nothing to do with the free market.
*How Much Does the President Cost?**
*
Political commentary sites are openly speculating on whether
Steyer can buy Obama's final decision on the Keystone XL
Pipeline, which would supply vast quantities of Canadian oil
to the U.S. The project has strong bipartisan and public
support; even two lengthy environmental analyses by the State
Department couldn't point to any major environmental impact.
Nevertheless, as the /Sunshine State News/ (Fla., April 25)
reported: "Never mind the Kochs. After assessing who did what
bad to America lately, I nominate Tom Steyer for the top of
the list. Last week the billionaire hedge fund manager from
San Francisco bought off the White House to the tune of $100
million in order to delay the Keystone XL pipeline decision."
(Note: Steyer retired some while ago from the hedge fund
business.)
Predictably, Landrieu broke Democratic ranks to castigate the
delay. She called Obama's decision "irresponsible, unnecessary
and unacceptable" -- a move to satisfy extreme radicals while
sacrificing 42,000 jobs and billions from the economy. Other
Democrats, such as Sen. Mark Begich of Alaska, joined her.
The man who bought the Senate floor, the man who bought Obama
... Thomas Steyer may also become the man who thwarted
Keystone and drove Canadian oil toward China. If he fractures
the Democratic Party, however, he may cost them more than he
can deliver.
"When you believe in things that you don't understand, then you suffer"
- Stevie Wonder "Superstition"
...
____________________________________________________________
*The #1 Worst Carb Ever?*
Click to Learn #1 Carb that Kills Your Blood Sugar (Don't Eat This!)
<http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL3132/536cb3789b8e5337866bbst04vuc>FixYourBloodSugar.com
<http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL3132/536cb3789b8e5337866bbst04vuc>
